Author: admin

  • Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-10-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of reports that the government of China has recently breached the United Nations Refugee Convention by refouling 30 North Koreans without giving them an opportunity to claim asylum nor to meet representatives of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    We are aware of reports of thirty North Koreans being sent back to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) after a period of detention in China.

    Despite claims by the DPRK authorities that forcibly repatriated refugees are well treated and reintegrated into DPRK society, reports suggest that they are often mistreated by the authorities.

    We will raise the issue of non-refoulement at the next UK-China Human rights Dialogue, scheduled to take place this month.

  • Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-10-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the government of North Korea, or any of its state-owned companies, has access to the London Stock Exchange or holds financial interests in the UK.

    Lord Young of Cookham

    As part of UN and EU sanctions, banks are required to close existing branches, subsidiaries or accounts in North Korea where it has been determined that they contribute to North Korea’s ballistic missile programmes. The sanctions also prohibit any commercial activity by the Government of North Korea (including legal persons, entities or bodies owned or controlled by them).

    Assets owned or controlled in the EU by designated DPRK persons, entities or bodies, including government bodies, are subject to an asset freeze and cannot be traded on the London Stock Exchange. A list of designations which has been placed in the Library includes a number of DPRK government and state-owned bodies. HM Treasury implements these financial sanctions in the UK. Non-compliance with financial sanctions is a criminal offence and HM Treasury works closely with law enforcement to ensure sanctions breaches are dealt with appropriately. For reasons of confidentiality, the Treasury does not make public the details of individual reports of frozen assets.

  • Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Trade

    Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Trade

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-10-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their assessment of the number of companies owned by UK nationals or headquartered in the UK which conduct business with the government of North Korea or any of its state-owned companies.

    Lord Price

    The Government does not have data on the number of companies owned by UK nationals or headquartered in the UK which conduct business with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK).

    Data on the value of trade between the UK and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is published by HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC). In 2015 the total bilateral trade in goods between the UK and the DPRK was $814,700.

  • Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Trade

    Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Trade

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-10-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their assessment of the effect of the United States’ North Korea Sanctions and Policy Enhancement Act of 2016 (H.R. 757) on UK-owned businesses and UK nationals which conduct business with the government of North Korea or its state-owned companies.

    Lord Price

    The Government has made no such assessment.

  • Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-10-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how they ensure that funds spent by the British Embassy in Pyongyang or funds dispersed by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office for North Korea activities are not diverted by the government of North Korea for use in its nuclear programme or human rights abuses.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) projects in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) are usually delivered through international Non-Governmental Organisations who operate in-country and are aimed at assisting some of the most vulnerable groups in North Korean society. Before selecting an implementing partner relevant due diligence checks are carried out which include, but are not limited to, obtaining assurances about: training provided to staff in relation to reporting bribery and corruption; how those concerns are shared with donors; and what policies, principles and procedures the organisation has in place to regulate its own conduct.

    In line with standard FCO project requirements detailed budgets are required for all projects and these are carefully checked to ensure both in-country and other costs are reasonable. Project implementers are required to provide financial reports and originals or copies of all invoices and receipts, as well as a Project Completion Report containing a detailed breakdown of all expenditure during the project period. The final payment on any project is only released after submission of a satisfactory Project Completion Report.

  • Baroness Bakewell of Hardington Mandeville – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Baroness Bakewell of Hardington Mandeville – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Bakewell of Hardington Mandeville on 2016-10-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have to ensure that commercial short-term lettings of accommodation, such as those offered by the AirBnB website, are safe and comply with fire regulations.

    Baroness Williams of Trafford

    The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 applies to houses or flats where the premises are not occupied as a private dwelling, including properties offering short term accommodation to paying guests.

  • Lord Beecham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Lord Beecham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Beecham on 2016-10-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will implement the recommendation made by the Committee on Elimination of Racial Discrimination to collect systemically disaggregated data on hate crimes.

    Baroness Williams of Trafford

    There is no current intention to disaggregate hate crime data on the grounds of race, but we will keep that under review. Since 2010, we have improved police recording of hate crime. Forces now capture data on all five of the monitored hate crime strands, and from April this year, forces have started to disaggregate hate crime data on the grounds of religion.

    We have noted the findings of the Council of Europe’s European Commission on Racism and Intolerance following an inspection of the United Kingdom earlier this year. The Government’s full response to the report can be found as an annex to the publication.

    We are clear that there is no excuse for hate crime against anyone of any nationality, ethnicity or religious background – it has no place whatsoever in our diverse society. This commitment is underpinned by some of the strongest legislation in the world.

    We welcome that the Commission has recognised the strength of our new hate crime action plan which will help reduce hate crime, increase reporting and improve support for victims. The hate crime action plan contains specific measures to increase the rate of prosecution and ensure that enhanced sentencing powers are used where appropriate.

    These measures include refreshed Crown Prosecution Service policy and legal guidance for prosecutors on racially and religiously aggravated crime and on prosecuting social media cases, and publicising convictions and information on enhanced sentencing outcomes.

  • Biography information for Lord Beecham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    Biography information for Lord Beecham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Biography information for Lord Beecham on 2016-10-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, of the 700 employers named and shamed” by them since October 2013 for failing to pay the minimum wage

    Baroness Neville-Rolfe

    The National Minimum Wage naming and shaming scheme represents the end point of civil sanctions against employers who fail to pay at least the appropriate rate of minimum wage to their workers. Where there is evidence that an offence has been committed the case will always be considered for criminal investigation which may in turn result in prosecutions. But criminal investigations are reserved for the most serious cases of non-compliance.

    Our number one priority is getting workers the money they are owed and the civil route is more successful in achieving this. Criminal investigations by HM Revenue & Customs and prosecutions by the Crown Prosecution Service will not necessarily result in arrears of wages being paid back to the workers. This would require further civil prosecutions following the Courts’ ruling.

    Under the civil route, employers are not only faced with reputational consequences, but also face a financial penalty for breaking the law.

  • Lord Beecham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Beecham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Beecham on 2016-10-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of the number of Deprivation of Liberty orders sought by care home owners and the proportion which are rejected, whether they are considering taking steps to improve the system; and if so, when they will publish details of those planned steps.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The Department has commissioned the Law Commission to carry out a review of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. The review is expected to be published at the end of the year.

    The Department will consider what steps may be necessary to improve the system in light of the review.

  • Lord Beecham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Lord Beecham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Beecham on 2016-10-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their response to the report by the Council of Europe about the incidence of hate crime in the UK, the apparent failure to prosecute such crimes, and the lack of data on the use of extended sentencing powers.

    Baroness Williams of Trafford

    Since 2010, we have improved police recording of hate crime. Forces now capture data on all five of the monitored hate crime strands, and from April this year, forces have started to disaggregate hate crime data on the grounds of religion.

    We have noted the findings of the Council of Europe’s European Commission on Racism and Intolerance following an inspection of the United Kingdom earlier this year. The Government’s full response to the report can be found as an annex to the publication.

    We are clear that there is no excuse for hate crime against anyone of any nationality, ethnicity or religious background – it has no place whatsoever in our diverse society. This commitment is underpinned by some of the strongest legislation in the world.

    We welcome that the Commission has recognised the strength of our new hate crime action plan which will help reduce hate crime, increase reporting and improve support for victims. The hate crime action plan contains specific measures to increase the rate of prosecution and ensure that enhanced sentencing powers are used where appropriate.

    These measures include refreshed Crown Prosecution Service policy and legal guidance for prosecutors on racially and religiously aggravated crime and on prosecuting social media cases, and publicising convictions and information on enhanced sentencing outcomes.